Panel Loader Theory and Ideas

Yup, I’m not at all surprised that given enough time, usage, carelessness, abuse — or just plain bad luck — a few of us would experience a zipper failure at some point — just as we all could expect possible failures in strap seams and plastic buckles (esp. the male half of it).

Interesting that many more people like to recall zipper failures (a few direct experiences no doubt but mostly just passing stuff on) — and not once about a plastic buckle mishap.

And yes, I did have to replace a broken plastic buckle once.

I’ve broken many zippers in panel loaders and I’ve broken many plastic buckles.

I don’t care if I break a buckle because its easy to replace. If I break a zipper, it’s more or less bye bye.

Zippers breaking? Yeah! Sleeping bags, tent doors, duffle bags, (more like the issue with panel loaders), jackets, zippered pockets on just about anything, , and we-don’t-want-to-talk-about-Levis-without-underwear.

Geez, you make a pack bag in a nice cylinder, put an idiot proof drawstring at the top and get going. The panel loader has the zipper, some compression straps, the fabric hod to try to keep the zipper somewhat waterproof and the amazing ability to dump all your stuff on the ground in one easy motion. I like my $30 long underwear dropped in the mud– SO much nicer to sleep in. And then the manufacturer has the gall to charge for all the extra hardware and assembly.

Brian did want feedback and these forums are a study in “what-if.” Oh boy, are we good at “what-if” <grin>

I noticed that a few people mentioned accessablity with regard to commonly needed items.

The arguement seems to be “I need access to stuff, like rain gear or sun screen, and top loaders make that easy with their straps and panels and lids and….”

Thats all fine, but one thing that seems to be missed is that panel loaders are just as easy to access, and you can keep everything in a single, simple, compartment.

With my Ghost, when I need access to something I – – unzip the bag. Its devilishly simple, and lays it all out there for you.

The bottom section is like a top loader, and that houses my sleeping bag and tarp and other things Im unlikely to need *now*. The rest is put into very light ditty bags for organization purposes, and those ride on top. Things like rain gear are packed in a spot easily accessable to the zipper, so I only have to crack the zipper enough to reach in and pull it out. Larger or less commonly retreived items can easily be accessed by opening the panel the whole way – The big stuff is still safely packed in the “top loader” section and the rest is as easy to get into as if it were a suitcase on vacation.

Ive seen lots of zippers fail, but usually because people overpack their bags and stress the zipper too much, not because of excess wear. Panel loaders encourage you to pack lighter, rather than stuff them to the breaking point.

The only major failure Ive ever had with my Ghost was when the hipbelt buckle broke – male tab. It happened in the parking lot at the trail head. I think it got crunched in the door or something. I replaced it with a spare 2in buckle purchased from REI and havent had a problem since.

All that being said, when the Ghost gives up the Ghost, Im going top loader full time. I also have the Ghost littlest brother, the MS Boogieman. Its a top loader and despite its size (1000ci) I can cram enough gear into it for a 3day, 3 season trip if Im going really minimalist. I wouldnt feel comfortable putting the same amount of strain on say, a MS Wraith (which is actually 600ci bigger), because the design of the panel loader cant support the “cram and go” that the Boogieman can.

Pick the right tool, I guess.

By my count, and after 3 days, one person has had a zipper failure with a panel loader and one person,in fact, has had many many failures with many bags.Hmmmm!!!

All other comments have once again been supposition and conjecture and according to Dale, “what ifs”. If we all lived in “what if” land, none of us would be lightweight backpackers. We would carry every concieveable item for every conceiveable contingency because “what if”. We would be back to carrying 2 lb 1st aid kits complete with sutures and Sam Splints and our packs would weigh 50 to 60 lbs for an overnight. I think most of us are brainiac enough to avoid stuffing too much into any pack. Most photos that accompany reviews of packs show fairly streamlined pack forms. I don’t see stuff hanging off of every strap on a pack and I certainly haven’t noticed packs so stuffed that they look as if they might burst. Given an ethic which stresses organization, economy, and simplicity, I can not understand this prejudice against panel loaders or the unreasoned and unreasonable fear of a zipper failing. Yes, all zippers fail at some point as does every other method of securing a pack. BUT absent a flood of documented zipper failures, which has not been demonstrated except hypothetically, I would hope that we can dispense with this aspect of discussing panel loaders and discuss whether there is a market for them. I for one, as I have frequently said, love my Ghost. Precisely because it allows me to see all of my gear and organize it effectively, I always know exactly where in my pack an item can be found. I can go right to it and not have to dig down to it in the dark, so to speak. It affords me with a pack that empties quickly when in camp and packs quickly, too. On the trail, gear can be very quickly accessed that I might need and I have never needed to unzip the whole pack. Usually, a 6 to 9 inch unzip is all that’s needed. They leak as do top loaders, but that is what garbage bags and gossamer gear pack liners are made for. They can be improved, as a few of us have indicated and so can top loaders. I feel that there is a market for each and adherents for each. Unless you have personal experience with some failure of either of these approaches to pack technology, can we stop with the demonizing of a technology that works.

This is a bit off topic but since I have you here I’ll ask anyway. I’m curious about how you load your ULA packs, where you place various items of gear etc . I’m particularly interested in how you utilize the outside pocket storage space. If you’ve covered this somewhere before, maybe you can include a link. Thanks.

One key thing about panel loaders: It allows optimal placement of heavy but commonly needed items in the lower half of the pack for better balance and carry without impacting ease of access. For example: Water, cameras, etc.

Here is an idea taken from my Osprey Eclipse and Dakine Ridge and Blade: Front panel access instead of back panel access.

Placing the zipper in the front panel (which is up against your back) is an idea to be considered.

The Eclipse does this by having a zipper that starts just above the waist belt and wraps all the way around the edges. A hoop frame system exists around the outside of the zipper. 3/4 of the front panel can peel open. This panel is padded but need not be. The load lifters have buckles and attatch to the hoop frame. The buckles must be detatched to fully peel back the panel, but without detatching them the zippers can be moved to easily access any 1/3 of the panel. This can be accessed by the hiker without removing the pack, or by other members of the party. Additionally, leaving the waist belt on, the back can be swiveled around the waist so it is hanging forward off the waist and be accessed fully without taking it off!

The Ridge (and Blade) has a central zip panel on the back served by two zipers and a little velcro at the top. Each side is unzipped and then strip is peeled back. This eliminates the need for unbuckling load lifters full peel, but only exposes 1/2 the panel. This back can also be twisted around and access by hanging off the waist strap in the front.

Benefits of front panel access:
1. Vastly reduces zipper exposure to the elements. Weatherproof zippers are not always necessary either.
2. Decreases zipper loading to near zero and therefor decreases chance of failure. Also allows smaller lighter zips.
3. Decreases consequences of zipper failure as a failed zip panel is held shut by the weight of the pack against your back.
4. Decreases problems of getting your backpadding wet/dirty if it is necessary to lay the pack down to open it. Pack can also be accessed fully while still wearing it!
5. The backpanel is now fully available for creative designs just like a top loader!:
A. YOU CAN ADD TOP STRAPS TO STRAP THINGS TO THE TOP OF THE PACK.
B. Ice axes and vertically attatched sleeping pads do not get in the way of access.
C. No loaded backpanel zip allows optimal compression strap placement for load compression/stabilization instead of zipper load support.

Cons:
1. Slightly less convenient in some ways than backpanel access, though better in others. Your access may be smaller or require clips for full access. Still worlds easier than a top loader.
2. There *may* be a slight weight penalty but that is only speculation. I don’t know enough. Smart design work would probably eliminate any weight and maybe lighten it!

I thought that idea might address some of the concerns people have as well as making a more versatile, durable, and lighter panel pack.

Brian,
I´m glad you´re considering this. Ben sold me on the Ghost a while back and I really got addicted to the panel loading design (I´m the one with the ündying love for my P-2¨). For me, it doesn´t encourage ¨sloppy¨packing. In fact, it´s just the opposite. I think it´s easier to fill in the dead space in the pack to make it carry better because everything is more visible than with a top loader. Like you, I don´t often need to access the main compartment of my pack while hiking: I simply like it for the ease of packing and unpacking. I´ve often thought that the perfect pack for me would be a Hybrid between the Ghost and P-2. I also agree with the comments above that the compression straps should compress the whole pack (more like the Osprey straightjacket system) and not just the sides. BTW, if you´re ever looking for testers to try out prototypes, you know where to find me…

I forgot to add that I think it´s important for a panel loader to open wide enough that you can see and have access to most of the main compartment. Some panel loaders have a very narrow opening (like the Gregory Whitney) and are very hard to pack. To me, this defeats the purpose. The Ghost opens up to reveal slightly more than 50% of the main compartment and I think this is ideal.

I know I'm bringing up a very old discussion, but I did a search on BPL for panel loaders and when I saw this I had to read.

Myself and my boyfriend are both serious photographers and have started to enjoy backpacking. After using "photo backpacks" for eight years or so and then beginning backpacking last year, I absolutely hate every photo backpack I've ever used and have started to carry my landscape photo equipment in my lightweight pack (an Osprey Talon 44). With my photography gear stowed inside (a professional Canon 1D series body and 2-3 lenses, plus filters, hoods, and some other accessories), I find that it is really difficult to access the contents of the pack when stopping to shoot, although the pack rides so much better and is so much more comfortable I use it anyway despite this annoying inconvience. My boyfriend uses his ULA Catalyst and loves it for backpacking. Because the Catalyst is much wider, he doesn't have as much trouble accessing his gear as I do when using it for photography. However for combined backpacking/photo trips, a panel loader would be indespensible. It would make the most sense to pack heavy camera gear close to the body around the middle of the back, just above the sleeping bag and pad. This means that clothes, shelter, etc. would go on top of the camera gear and need to be removed whenever stopping to shoot. A panel loader would not only make accessing photography equipment much faster and easier, but it would alliviate having to unload extra gear to get to the equipment. Chris swears by his ULA pack and I think dyneema gridstop is probably one of the most affordable durable lightweight materials for pack construction, so I would love to see ULA make a dyneema gridstop panel loader with some sort of framestay and a way to attach a tripod externally. It would be the perfect pack for my needs!

As per zippers failing, every photo backpack I have ever used has had long zippers holding the panel together. If a zipper fails on these packs, it is absolutely catastrophic with camera gear costing anywhere from a few hundred to over $20k crashing to the ground (and breaking, unlike a sleeping bag, pad, clothing). I've used at least four different panel loading photo backpacks without any problem with the zippers, although Chris's photo backpack has had its zipper fail. The largest photo backpack I have has two buckles that clip along either side of the zipper which double as compression straps and a backup in case of zipper failure. Another photo backpack uses a front panel (the panel closest to your back) zipper, which works pretty well and has the added protection of making your gear harder to steal while being worn.

Brian, if you ever go through with making a ULA panel loader, please let me know!

Kari Post
http://www.karipost.com